Kraff 1982.
Methods | Study design: Parallel group RCT | |
Participants |
Country: USA Setting: Eye hospital Intervention: NSAIDs plus steroids
Comparator: Steroids plus placebo
Included criteria: Eligible for extracapsular cataract extraction with implantation of a Shearing posterior chamber lens. Excluded criteria: NR Pretreatment: None noted; age, gender, follow‐up and endothelial cell density preoperative compared. Eyes: Unclear if one or both eyes included. |
|
Interventions |
Intervention: NSAIDs plus steroids
Comparator: Steroids plus placebo
Type of surgery: ECCE and phacoemulsification (unplanned ICCE n = 19 were excluded). |
|
Outcomes |
Follow‐up: between 2.5 and 12 months. Quote: "The mean interval between surgery and angiography was 4.1 months, with a range of 2.5 to 12 months. Ninety percent of the angiograms were performed between 2.5 and 5 months after surgery, and 10% between 6 and 12 months after surgery."
|
|
Contact details |
Authors name: Manus C Kraff Institution: Abraham Lincoln School of Medicine, University of Illinois Email: NR Address: 5600 W. Addison Street, Chicago, IL 60634 |
|
Notes |
Funding sources: Core Grant EY 1792 NEI Bethesda Maryland Declaration of interest: NR Date study conducted: NR Trial registration number: NR Contacting study investigators: Trial authors not contacted. |
|
Risk of bias | ||
Bias | Authors' judgement | Support for judgement |
Random sequence generation (selection bias) | Low risk | Judgement comment: Randomisation was using a table of random numbers. |
Allocation concealment (selection bias) | Unclear risk | Judgement comment: Not reported how allocation administered. |
Blinding of participants and personnel (performance bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Judgement comment: Quote: "The study was double‐masked; neither the physician nor the patient knew what drops the patient was receiving." |
Blinding of outcome assessment (detection bias) All outcomes | Low risk | Judgement comment: Quote: "The study was double‐masked; neither the physician nor the patient knew what drops the patient was receiving." Quote: "The angiograms were read in a masked fashion by a retired specialist (LMJ) who had no knowledge of either the drug regimen or the type of surgical procedure." |
Incomplete outcome data (attrition bias) All outcomes | Unclear risk | Judgement comment: Some patients were excluded (n = 19) and not reported: two with vitreous loss, two with vitreous pressure and a shallow anterior chamber and 15 with possible rupture of the posterior capsule. Unclear which groups these were in. Follow‐up high for visual acuity (> 95%) but lower for CMO (60% in indomethacin group versus 64% in placebo). |
Selective reporting (reporting bias) | Unclear risk | Judgement comment: No access to protocol or trial registry entry. |